Which upper (first)?

[shaman]

I say first because I will probably end up with them both and more.

Trying to replace a sold 20" 7.62x39 and .308　bolt. The x39 is deeply imbedded in the family by way of ammo, SKSs, etc. Use will be up to pig/deer size game in Texas, and long range shooting when money and time allow me to get to the Best of the West range would be nice. But the .22LR will be the first for long range.

I am looking at one/two of 3 options

1. 18-24" Grendel. For "stand" hunting, or when walking long distances/tight spaces is not needed.

2. Midlength or carbine gassed x39. Alpha Shooting Sports, M1S etc. There's a few used in the $5-600 range. Would get an RDS or 1-something scope

3. 11" x39. Was considering something more manuverable than 16" plus stock incase we have to get into brush or trees. Have unused lower, as well as considering a NFA or PC lower for weight savings. Leave the Grendel in the stand and strap on the pistol for walking. Irons or RDS.

Ammo for 2 or 3 is already there, and the extra range for the 6.5G isn't. That said, the FPE of the Grendel is on par with the x39 at PBR, and just runs away after that. The x39 would be a plinker/hunter, and the Grendel would be plinker(Wolf)/hunter/target.

Any comments on criticism on what was said is more than welcome. Been thinking Grendel first for a while, but lately they have dried up and the x39s have come out or retirement.

 

[LRRPF52]

Re: Which upper (first)?

In my mind, .22LR and 7.62x39 don't fit into the same sentence as "long-range". The 7.62x39 is a great pig gun as you described.

If you have to have another Russian short, I would get an upper from ARP in 16" or shorter length.

You can also use the Grendel for stalking if you get a medium contour 18" barrel.

If you're looking at those price points, go with J&T/Double Star. They have actual Grendel-chambered guns/uppers as well, and guys have been getting great results with them.

 

[shaman]

Re: Which upper (first)?

Grendels from AA are staying around $800 used for the Entry 20". I was referring to the .22 for learning wind etc. I have no problem going $800-1000 for a grendel, the 7.62x39 isn't going to be accurate one way or the other, so I am not too worried about going the best of the best for that. My M1S worked fine, just too long, and 1/2" thread instead of 5/8x24

 

[groundhogbuster]

Re: Which upper (first)?

Have you even considered a 6.8x43? Run the ballistics. The 6.8 is much better in my opinion than the 6.5. Look up AR performance, and read the FAQ sections. I have a good friend on a SEAL team who runs 6.8 ONLY, and said he'd never run another .556, and even sold his Grendel, as did I. They put deer on their butt and make a heck of a good HD gun. Pushing 85gr pills at 3200fps ain't bad for a 16" brrl.

 

[TonyAngel]

Re: Which upper (first)?

I was just checking out your thread and really don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I have to ask. Why do you dismiss the 7.62X39's accuracy potential so quickly?

One of the most accurate short range rifles I've shot was in 7.62X39 in the form of a CZ bolt action with good ammunition.

 

[shaman]

Re: Which upper (first)?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: groundhogbuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Have you even considered a 6.8x43? Run the ballistics. The 6.8 is much better in my opinion than the 6.5. Look up AR performance, and read the FAQ sections. I have a good friend on a SEAL team who runs 6.8 ONLY, and said he'd never run another .556, and even sold his Grendel, as did I. They put deer on their butt and make a heck of a good HD gun. Pushing 85gr pills at 3200fps ain't bad for a 16" brrl. </div></div>

Groundhogbuster, I just have no love for the .270. If I were to consider something else, it would be a .300WTF, after I had spent all of my x39 ammo. maybe an 6x45 if we ever get into 5.56 shooting. And maybe I am missing something, but in looking at the Hornady website, the 6.5G loading has more velocity and fpe than all three of the 6.8 loads at 500 yards, and only marginally less velocity(still winning in fpe though) than the loads at 100 yards. I understand the the SPC2 is what it was supposed to be in the first place, and all of the available bullets that get plastered all over every G vs SPC thread. It's never done it for me, just like the .308 never has either. If I needed a farther than x39 but not quite as far as Grendel, not in Texas mind you, then yes, but giving up 200 fpe at 100 yards I don't think will make much difference.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TonyAngel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was just checking out your thread and really don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I have to ask. Why do you dismiss the 7.62X39's accuracy potential so quickly?

One of the most accurate short range rifles I've shot was in 7.62X39 in the form of a CZ bolt action with good ammunition. </div></div>
Tony, accuracy may need to be replaced comparative accuracy with the aforementioned ammo, or effeciency, etc. The best(read most expensive) x39 ammo I have right now is the steel SST from Hornady. The Grendel might get some wolf every now and then, but it would be mostly for at range target shooting or hunting(read good ammo). I don't see the need for premium ammo in a 25-100 yard plinker shooter, but do, if the accuracy is worth it, at 500+ yards. Look at the numbers

6.5G with a 123gr A-Max
1612fps/709fpe -52.50 drop

7.62x39 with a 123gr SST
1129/348 -96.60

I might as well shoot the 5.45x39 with 60gr V-max
1454/282 -58.80